I don't think there's any question that right now the MLB All-Star Game is, by leaps and bounds, the best of the 4 major sports.

People poke fun at the Winner Gets Homefield Advantage in the World Series rule, but it has absolutely worked.

People just want to bag on Bud Selig no matter if the idea is a good one or not. I don't understand how the winner getting homefield advantage is any worse than the old way of alternating between leagues each year. That was pretty damn arbitrary too.

People just want to bag on Bud Selig no matter if the idea is a good one or not. I don't understand how the winner getting homefield advantage is any worse than the old way of alternating between leagues each year. That was pretty damn arbitrary too.

Because the leagues didn't play each other during the regular season until 1997. The leagues had separate umpires, league presidents...the were separate. One league's best team had nothing to do with the other league's best team. So the only fair thing to do was to alternate home field advantage.

Now, if they wanted to change it to best overall record, I could accept that. But giving it to the winner of an exhibition game is just about the most stupid thing in baseball. It's embarrassingly stupid for MLB to do it that way.

I thought last night's game was almost perfect- I've loved the All Star game since I was a little kid- from the player announcements at the beginning to the last pitch- well played game- loved the whole Mariano Rivera thing- well deserved and well done.

I even liked Tim McCarver choking up at the end and his story of the All Star game memories he treasures most-

Because the leagues didn't play each other during the regular season until 1997. The leagues had separate umpires, league presidents...the were separate. One league's best team had nothing to do with the other league's best team. So the only fair thing to do was to alternate home field advantage.

Now, if they wanted to change it to best overall record, I could accept that. But giving it to the winner of an exhibition game is just about the most stupid thing in baseball. It's embarrassingly stupid for MLB to do it that way.

That isn't any more fair than flipping a coin. Each season is unique. I don't think the team that didn't get home field thought it was ok because the year before some other team from their same league did get it.

Because the leagues didn't play each other during the regular season until 1997. The leagues had separate umpires, league presidents...the were separate. One league's best team had nothing to do with the other league's best team. So the only fair thing to do was to alternate home field advantage.

Now, if they wanted to change it to best overall record, I could accept that. But giving it to the winner of an exhibition game is just about the most stupid thing in baseball. It's embarrassingly stupid for MLB to do it that way.

Considering low little crossover play there is between the leagues I don't think that's very far, either. In 2005, for example, the Cardinals finished 1 game better than the White Sox but if you look at the strength of schedules across the league, the American League was decisively better than the NL that year.

I don't see how people could watch last night's game, where there was a significant effort by the players to win and play well, compared to the downright embarrassing half-assery that the NFL and NBA put on and say that the idea hasn't worked beautifully?

Considering low little crossover play there is between the leagues I don't think that's very far, either. In 2005, for example, the Cardinals finished 1 game better than the White Sox but if you look at the strength of schedules across the league, the American League was decisively better than the NL that year.

I don't see how people could watch last night's game, where there was a significant effort by the players to win and play well, compared to the downright embarrassing half-assery that the NFL and NBA put on and say that the idea hasn't worked beautifully?

Very well stated. The NFL is neutral site and primarily warm weather only. They give advantage to teams built on the passing game. People don't seem to complain about this nearly as much. (Drives me nuts)

NBA gives best record the edge of home advantage in home town. Home team wins 80 percent of the NBA Finals. I enjoy the power being taken out of the best team's hands. Best regular season record is it's own reward. No need for an extra edge of home advantage in my mind.

Considering low little crossover play there is between the leagues I don't think that's very far, either. In 2005, for example, the Cardinals finished 1 game better than the White Sox but if you look at the strength of schedules across the league, the American League was decisively better than the NL that year.

I don't see how people could watch last night's game, where there was a significant effort by the players to win and play well, compared to the downright embarrassing half-assery that the NFL and NBA put on and say that the idea hasn't worked beautifully?

Yea, i have heard a bit of complaining that the All Star Game was boring. Well, it was played/managed like it was a REAL GAME. The players actually played hard and the managers managed like they wanted to win. So which is it? Do people want to see the players playing hard, or do they want to see players leaving after they are taken out in the 1st inning like back in the 90s/00s and then complain about how the players don't care anymore? You just can't please everybody.